Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area

mariem_1 (mariem_1) wrote in unfunnybusiness,
@ 2011-05-25 11:10:00

Huge asexuality wank on LJ and Tumblr
The points of contention are:

- whether sexual privilege exists,

- whether identifying as a gray/demisexual is misogynistic and slut-shaming,

- whether heteroromantic asexuals can identify as queer,

- whether asexuals are oppressed,

- whether any asexuals beside aromantic ones should be considered asexuals etc.

The whole thing is a big clusterfuck.

The Sexual Privilege Post

Sexual Privilege

Major demisexuality/grey-a fail— courtesy of ONTD feminism on LJ

everybody's queer because words have no meaning

Sexual Privilege Checklist

http://wecameforyourdead.tumblr.com/post/5808352188/yeah-i-saw-some-valid-criticism-of-asexuals

http://lizziegoneastray.tumblr.com/post/5795373977/dear-haters-trolls-and-general-dumbasses-who-are

Asexuality and Queerness

Erasure and Identity

We're All In This Together

How It All Happens

http://aceadmiral.tumblr.com/post/5758994877/frankly-im-extremely-sick-of-the-you-dont-face

Warning: More rage about people who hate asexuals

(Post a new comment)

	hilohello 2011-05-25 02:53 pm UTC (link)
	Goddammit, I can see where everyone is coming from. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	esclaramonde 2011-05-25 03:25 pm UTC (link)
	Yeah, it really comes across to me as more of a discussion which people on both sides are legitimately hurt/angry, not just the latest $Fail. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	rosehiptea 2011-05-26 03:40 am UTC (link)
	That's what I think too. (Reply to this)(Parent)

chikane
2011-05-25 03:24 pm UTC (link)

To be honest, both sides have some good points. And a whole lot of FAIL covering it.

There's the asexual erasure on one side, which is bullshit. Erasure is fail. "Hi, I know you better than you do, what you are doesn't exist, lol!" is fail. "asexuals are a slutshaming identity" (what the heck?) is total fail.

And on the other side, there's "omg straight shaming, what about the straight people" and "Just for being sexual, they are privileged because, while they are not heteronormative, they are at least sexual. There’s at least some common ground there." (actual quote) among other fail.

The later is especially rage inducing to me as a gay person because no, there's no common ground between me and a homophobic person against an asexual person. Quite the opposite: The homophobe is trying to criminalize my sexual behavior so all I have left is either a)asexual or b)heterosexual. See also groups like the catholic church and their "recommendation" for gay people, and gay people being blamed if they are murdered (gay panic).
If anything, the common ground is against the gay person in this case. It's an argument that is ...oh...erasing the struggles we face. Quite a douchy move indeed.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

esclaramonde
2011-05-25 03:36 pm UTC (link)

I think the slut-shaming accusation is more about demisexuality than asexuality, although I haven't read everything and might just be missing a big thread somewhere. The idea is that if you split demisexuality and sexuality apart, you're implying that all people who identify as sexual are interested in having sex with people they don't have emotional connections to, which is problematic given the societal "having sex with people you don't know is slutty and bad" message, and is further complicated by the fact that there's a range of libido levels and comfort zones etc. and there are plenty of people who identify as sexual but fall into the definition of demisexual and don't want to call themselves that because they find it unnecessary or othering.

Super-long sentence there, sorry.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	honorh 2011-05-26 01:35 am UTC (link)
	I find it unnecessary, personally. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

esclaramonde, 2011-05-26 01:48 am UTC

	snarkhunter 2011-05-26 02:33 pm UTC (link)
	I'm sorry, I'm genuinely confused. There's a category called "demisexual" that means...what? You're waiting to have sex? You don't jump into bed with everyone? Isn't that just...splitting hairs? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

esclaramonde, 2011-05-26 02:36 pm UTC

snarkhunter, 2011-05-26 02:43 pm UTC

theninth, 2011-05-26 03:27 pm UTC

snarkhunter, 2011-05-26 04:23 pm UTC

theninth, 2011-05-26 05:07 pm UTC

snarkhunter, 2011-05-26 06:47 pm UTC

greenling, 2011-05-26 09:38 pm UTC

rosehiptea, 2011-05-27 08:40 pm UTC

rosehiptea, 2011-05-27 08:41 pm UTC

alexa, 2011-05-26 05:17 pm UTC

theninth, 2011-05-26 05:38 pm UTC

rhosyn_du, 2011-05-26 06:11 pm UTC

alexa, 2011-05-26 06:36 pm UTC

rhosyn_du, 2011-05-26 08:59 pm UTC

chikane, 2011-05-26 04:36 pm UTC

galletas, 2011-05-27 04:42 pm UTC

melannen
2011-05-25 03:48 pm UTC (link)

>>The later is especially rage inducing to me as a gay person because no, there's no common ground between me and a homophobic person against an asexual person.

See, this argument has a lot of merit, but it's going to make a lot of asexuals upset too, because it's erasing the struggles asexuals face. A gay person is going to experience different oppressions, yes.

But an asexual does experiences a common ground there: the clearest example is probably that a homophobe and a gay person are about equally likely to tell an asexual "you're just repressed"; "have you looked into medication?"; "you need to have sex and then you'll learn what you're missing;" "asexuality doesn't really exist stop trying to get attention for yourself;" "you don't know what your experiences actually are, let me explain them to you." I'm sure as a gay person you don't experience that as common ground you have with straights, because it's not something that affects you directly; but to an asexual person it really matters.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

chikane, 2011-05-25 04:11 pm UTC

melannen, 2011-05-25 04:59 pm UTC

chikane, 2011-05-25 06:26 pm UTC

beccastareyes, 2011-05-25 06:54 pm UTC

kylenne, 2011-05-26 05:31 am UTC

sandglass, 2011-05-26 06:48 pm UTC

chikane, 2011-05-26 07:25 pm UTC

kylenne, 2011-05-26 08:14 pm UTC

	keri 2011-05-25 04:32 pm UTC (link)
	Blech. Suddenly I'm given a very vivid reminder for why I stopped following AVEN and asexuality blogs and the comm on LJ. It's all way too much thought and effort put into something that is a "not" for me. :/ It's all such a giant mess. (Reply to this)(Thread)

bemysty
2011-05-25 05:10 pm UTC (link)

Same here.

Summarizing my "experience" would just turn into massive tl;dr, so let's just say I don't really identify as asexual because for me it's just something I have no particular feelings about, either positively or negatively - it didn't even occur to me to think of my sexuality until someone tried to talk me into identifying as a lesbian (don't ask, it was rage-inducing).

From the outside I guess I fall into the asexuality spectrum on the aromantic side, but I personally just... don't care. I use the term asexual when talking with others about it out of courtesy (i.e. so they can wrap their heads around it), but I don't like to attach that label to me.

And that would be why I'm not jumping into any of this despite falling in the... boundaries of the debate, I guess.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

keri, 2011-05-25 05:16 pm UTC

bemysty, 2011-05-25 05:23 pm UTC

keri, 2011-05-25 05:31 pm UTC

bemysty, 2011-05-25 05:44 pm UTC

keri, 2011-05-25 05:47 pm UTC

bemysty, 2011-05-25 05:49 pm UTC

telegramsam, 2011-05-25 08:19 pm UTC

dreamer_marie, 2011-05-25 10:04 pm UTC

hilohello, 2011-05-25 10:41 pm UTC

jupiterpluvius, 2011-05-26 01:33 am UTC

sistercoyote, 2011-05-26 02:39 am UTC

blue_penguin, 2011-05-26 03:16 am UTC

rosehiptea, 2011-05-26 03:44 am UTC

snarkhunter, 2011-05-26 02:38 pm UTC

hilohello, 2011-05-26 04:27 am UTC

pantyless_angel, 2011-05-26 03:43 pm UTC

justira
2011-05-25 04:33 pm UTC (link)

[Disclaimer: have seriously not had time to read all the things, still catching up]

So from... what I've seen so far, agreeing about points on both sides but it... seems to me that this is one place where absolute thinking/terminology is at least partially at fault.

Basically, has situational and/or relative privilege been raised here? (I couldn't find it, but I may not have read the right parts!) It seems like at least part of the issue here is in trying to discuss in absolute terms a framework that's embedded in complex intersectional identities, whose interactions depend heavily on context.

idk! just a thought from reading so far =\

*back to reading*

(Reply to this)

kattahj
2011-05-25 06:37 pm UTC (link)

Oh wow, what a mess all around. I'm not convinced of any systematic sexual privilege, but OTOH as a bi person I've had gay people try to push me out of the queer section enough that I'm instinctively distrustful of queer policing.

Plus, as a single bi person who's likely to remain so for quite some time, I'm painfully aware that in my country, unlike a lesbian couple I'm not allowed insemination. (I am allowed adoption - which is more expensive in addition to various ethical problems - so whatever logic used in the laws is just beyond me. And people in a stable nonromantic relationship aren't allowed to adopt or inseminate together, because apparently they can't be trusted to stay together and romantic couples can.) Which is such a big deal in my life right now that I can't quite set it aside and try to look at this from a non-selfish view point.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	quantumreality 2011-05-25 06:38 pm UTC (link)
	THISing your first para. As for your second? I really feel bad for not being able to say anything other than "geez, that massively sucks." Um, coffee? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

kattahj, 2011-05-25 06:48 pm UTC

deadrose, 2011-05-25 10:20 pm UTC

kattahj, 2011-05-26 04:21 am UTC

	yolanee 2011-05-27 10:34 am UTC (link)
	Yeah, I'm seconding your first paragraph as well. But interestingly it never happened to me in queer spaces outside internet. We can't even adopt here (Czech repupblic). Because you know, gay and bi people only raise gay and bi kids and we can't have that! I don't know about insemination though. It's not something I have thought about yet. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

kattahj, 2011-05-27 08:11 pm UTC

	quantumreality 2011-05-25 06:42 pm UTC (link)
	After seeing all that stuff? My reaction is: http://imgur.com/2mPqp.png (Reply to this)

	arachnejericho 2011-05-25 11:11 pm UTC (link)
	The already confusing-to-me topic of sexuality just got more confusing and added hurtful on top. I don't even. (Reply to this)

sandglass
2011-05-25 11:49 pm UTC (link)

I wish I could put together an opinion on the asexuality thing, but I can't see past the flames over someone who self identifies as hetero-romantic also identifying as queer and calling it "Oppression Olympics" to point out queer is not a term they get to use.

If a bunch of queer people are saying, "Hey, we don't want you using that word" STOP USING THAT WORD.

Bonus: Like a week ago, a friend brought this up to me with no links, and I told her I wasn't sure if asexuals should or shouldn't identify as queer. But fuck polisci-prelaw.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	jupiterpluvius 2011-05-26 01:39 am UTC (link)
	I am not as pissed off about asexual heteroromantic people using "queer" as a self-identifier as I am about heterosexual kinky people using "queer" as a self-identifier. That's setting the bar relatively low, though. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

sandglass, 2011-05-26 02:00 am UTC

	I'm still twelve. bacon_lover 2011-05-26 03:56 am UTC (link)
	butt fuck polisci-prelaw Sorry. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: I'm still twelve. -

sandglass, 2011-05-26 06:27 pm UTC

sequinedlizard
2011-05-26 12:32 am UTC (link)

-rubs temples-

Yes, being expected to be a sexual being when you are NOT a sexual being is unfair. Yes, asexual individuals do get erased in many discussions, and that sucks. However, a lot of the things that I have seen asexuals have to deal with stem from things like sexism, misogyny, and homophobia, not simply saying "people need to have sex." There are loooottss of people that demonize, harass, or kill queer people for being sexual creatures - our sexual acts are not held in a position of privilege.

There are some asexual individuals who have romantic but not sexual inclinations towards people of their same sex or gender. Those people will get very little flack for using the label "queer" because they still deal with the shit from homophobia that all queer people get.

People who only have romantic inclinations towards their opposite sex or gender do not have to deal with homophobia. That is one small pile of shit they get to avoid (they have to deal with the other piles of shit that society deals to them, though, and those piles all suck). If you do not have ANY attraction, INCLUDING romantic attraction, towards people of the same sex or gender as you, then you are not queer.

Yes, many queer groups will accept asexuals, and many asexuals may find comfort in queer groups. And I don't want to take that away from them - people do need spaces to feel comfortable and figure stuff out. But if you're only romantically attracted (yes, I know romance and sex are not synonymous, and the fact they ARE frequently linked is a problem) to the binary opposite - you're... straight. You're asexual, but you're straight. Any queer groups that are welcoming you are being nice, and trying to be understanding because, yeah, you do have some shit to deal with that society doesn't think about. But if you're talking about how you don't have any interest in sex to people who may be killed for having sex... there's a bit of a disconnect there, y'know?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

violetsquirrel
2011-05-26 07:29 am UTC (link)

That's an extremely narrow definition of queer you're using there. It doesn't even include a lot of trans* people, which means it's way off base with how most people define the term.

As far as I'm concerned, queer is a pretty big umbrella term that encompasses all kinds of 'non-standard' sexual and gender identities. If asexual people want to share that umbrella with me because they don't conform to what society expects them to be like and therefore have trouble, that's totally fine with me. If you only feel comfortable and accepted within a queer context, then that's a pretty big indicator that you're queer.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

aaron_agonistes
2011-05-26 06:42 pm UTC (link)

If you do not have ANY attraction, INCLUDING romantic attraction, towards people of the same sex or gender as you, or you are trans* then you are not queer.

Not all trans* people identify as queer, but I feel strongly that the label of queer has to be made available to them.

I do, however, completely agree that heteroromantic asexuals don't fit my definition of queer, for all the reasons you cited. It's the "hetero" part that's a factor, not the "sexual".

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

rhosyn_du, 2011-05-26 09:27 pm UTC

kelmendi, 2011-05-26 10:56 pm UTC

sequinedlizard, 2011-05-28 01:15 am UTC

jupiterpluvius
2011-05-26 01:38 am UTC (link)

I think that asexual people's issues and concerns deserve a lot more attention from everyone in society. Absolutely.

But "queer" has a specific meaning that doesn't include "asexual" at this point in history. I get that there are a lot of commonalities, and that queer people and asexual people (and trans people of all sexual orientations) are often fighting together against a cis/hetero/sexualnormative paradigm. Co-opting other peoples' self-identifiers won't actually help fight that paradigm, though.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	bacon_lover 2011-05-26 04:13 am UTC (link)
	I Id as queer, and I have no clear idea of what it means. Which seems pretty ridiculous, but there ya go. What does it mean, specifically? I'll just read what you write, and not comment--so don't worry about this being like setting up a target for me to shoot down. Your comments are usually good read--I just want your opinion. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

quantumreality, 2011-05-26 02:39 pm UTC

Re: I'm still twelve. -

sandglass, 2011-05-26 06:26 pm UTC

jupiterpluvius
2011-05-29 01:14 pm UTC (link)

Sorry I missed this. I like this overview quite a bit.

LGBT people have been called "queer" as a term of derogation for decades, and reclaiming it feels important to many people in that community. Asexual people haven't been called "queer" as a term of derogation to my knowledge. To me, that's a key difference.

I in no way mean to diminish the challenges and struggles of asexual people. But not every struggle is the exact same struggle, and not every self-identifier is equally apropos to every person who experiences marginalization.

I am certainly open to hearing other points of view on this topic; the poster whose post and comments are the subject of this ufb entry didn't approach the issue in a way I found at all compelling, but I can imagine other people who also self-identify as asexual framing it in different ways that I found more convincing.

And of course, there are millions if not billions of queer people in the world, and therefore millions if not billions of opinions on everything... ;)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

jupiterpluvius, 2011-05-29 01:16 pm UTC

bacon_lover, 2011-06-02 07:05 am UTC

Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map